1 Wait. That means you are non religious yet vote for people who are.

That means......you are voting for people who do not push your non religious agenda!!!!!!! Because to be honest you would only vote for non religous people like yourself.

YOU HYPOCRITE!

2 Glenn's failure to use a pretty font on his blog undermines his entire homosexualist argument.

3 Hi there, RWS... I'm genuinely happy to see you out here. I'll miss your blog.

Anyway, just to get into that, I'm religious and married to the daughter of a clergyman... I'm less threatened by religious folk in this country than I am by people who are on a crusade to stamp out religion in this country. I don't terribly like to see legislation on social issues, but I'll roll with a bit of it.

tmi3rd

4 "Why are non-religious blue staters like me so in favor of the Republican Party?

Because the left is fundamentally creepy and nasty"

Ace, seriously, this is one of the better things you've written.

Now post that ad I mailed to you earlier today.

5 I love how you neocons always think you have the moral high ground on every single issue, while at the same time wrapping yourself up in the worst kinds of hypocrisy. You should be happy that these traitors to their sexual orientation are being exposed for what they are -- fascists. I suppose that you and your fellow Bush cultists only oppose fascism when it comes dressed in a turban, and has brown skin.

To recap: Anyone who opposes gay marriage is a terrorist... except for, you know, actual terrorists.

6 I love how you neocons always think you have the moral high ground on every single issue, while at the same time wrapping yourself up in the worst kinds of hypocrisy. You should be happy that these traitors to their sexual orientation are being exposed for what they are -- fascists. I suppose that you and your fellow Bush cultists only oppose fascism when it comes dressed in a turban, and has brown skin.

To recap: Anyone who opposes gay marriage is a terrorist... except for, you know, actual terrorists.

7 Ace,

Good post, but this is just the latest example of what has been going on since at least Clarence Thomas.

Think of what the left did to a black man who was nominated to the Supreme Court. They attacked and smeared him unbelievably over allegations about essentially nothing (and what was clearly nothing even to the left when the left forgave Clinton for far far worse actual conduct) because he was a black conservative.

One lesson that was clear from Thomas's hearing was that for the left 'Blacks are in on a pass' and if they stray from the party line they will be demonized.

The moral bankuptcy of the left has been there for all to see for at least 15 years now, but because of the left's control of the msm and academia, it is never effectively called to account for its dishonesty.

8 BTW, that's a Hot Air link, so you won't get dirty by clicking on it. I'll never link Glenn Greenwald. Maybe Rick Ellensburg, but never Glenn Greenwald.

Oh, come on! You're linking to HotAir because Allahpundit is flirting shamelessly with KP.

9 Because the left is fundamentally creepy and nasty

That's a symptom, not their nature. What they believe in tends to make them that way, or rather what they don't believe in.

However, why does this nobody keep getting so much attention, why do people blog on what he says? Is there someone I can pay to get attention like that out of the blue?

10 Religious from Ohio here, neither red nor blue state.

Sooner or later, these folk like Gleen must realize that we just DO NOT CARE WHO'S A FAG, as long as they keep it to themselves.

Back in my day, that was the Love that dare not speak its name. Nowadays, it's the Love that can't shut up. I do not give one flying fuck one way or the other.

11 Karol should be ashamed, objectifying Ace like that...


I have nothing of substance to add on the politically relevant part, Ace pretty much nailed it.

12 I wish I knew how to out you.

13 Ace,

Since we are talking sex scandals...I felt the need to drop the bomb and "out" Ace. You can see the photo here (very safe for work) http://predatorintelligence.blogspot.com/

14 You said rectitude. Heh, heh.

15 Ace: "But you can't have a religion without a Devil. "

Alear: That's why I'm voting Cthulhu in 2008. Screw the lesser of two evils, let's get the best of Evil.

16 I, for one, see absolutely no hypocricy here at all. How, pray tell, are we to protect our children from Gay republican Congressmen if we don't know who they are?
Because they're out there
waiting...
to IM the children

17 Give me a break. I agree with you that "outing" this Senator was the wrong thing to do, but the idea that it somehow proves that right-wingers are somehow more "civil" than the left is hilarious.

Call me back when the right stops accusing all leftists of being terrorist-loving traitors who should be locked up or executed.

18

"When people stop believing in God, they don't believe in nothing -- they believe in anything."
 

--  GK Chesterton

19 Supreme Evil. Sweet. My high school guidance counselor told me I would never amount to anything. I think I'll turn him into a newt.

20 Didn't these pinheads already try this in '04 with the whole "Mary Cheney is a lesbian" thing? Definition of insanity...

21 Ah, yes, AJB, and how many doors have been kicked in in this country in the last 20 years to arrest those that are speaking out?

Actually, come to think of it, one door has been kicked in... in Miami, to take Elian Gonzales back to Cuba.

tmi3rd

22 Call me back when the right stops accusing all leftists of being terrorist-loving traitors who should be locked up or executed
You're mischaracterizing our characterization of leftists. We don't call all leftists traitors or "terrorist-lovers", just the ones who ARE. For example, Charlie Wrangle called them "so-called terrorists"... that isn't treason or terrorist-love, that is just retarded, and I think that the same applies to most leftists.

On the other hand, someone like Michael Moore who openly cheers for terrorists ("Minutemen", he admiringly calls them), certainly approaches terror-love, but I think even he still is just retarded.

Someone like Ramsey Clark, though, certainly fits your original description.

The problem with the left is that they make up all of this shit we supposedly say, and then go on these 6 year dillusional rampages based on those things. Currently, we have someone outing gays because he thinks that "I oppose gay marriage" is equal to "I hate gay people and want to kill them all, or at least deprive them of civil rights".

23 Crap! Someone bought www.cthulhu2008.org (and .com), but there isn't anything there yet.

24 You know, we're about as redneck down here in rural Iowa as it comes. Our county of about 8000 voted 93% for Bush in 04. Yet we don't give a damn about who's doing what to whom in their bedroom, nor do we give the occasional gay cowboys (always well dressed) who come into our small town bar any crap. They're good guys - so what if they like each other? And the feeling is pretty universal. Whatever trips your trigger - just leave me and my vices alone kind of redneck land.

When it comes marriage, a lot of us figure the government shouldn't have any business recognizing marriage. Let them recognize partnerships - gay and straight. Marriage has meant something for many thousands of years, so we'd appreciate it if we don't go doing the Big Brother business and start changing them. Keep the government out of the bedroom and let people be themselves.

For all these leftist narcissists, they've got more serious issues, running around and trying to ruin other peoples lives. It's no different than how they run nanny state governments. Gays, Jews, Bohunks, Latinos, Blacks - we all are much better off without those loathing weirdos messing with our lives. A vote for them is like putting a hole in your head.

25

From that famous rightwing commentator Salman Rushdie:

“If tomorrow the Israel/Palestine issue was resolved to the total happiness of all parties, it would not diminish the amount of terrorism coming out of al-Qa’ida by one jot. It’s not what they’re after,” he adds, his foot tapping against mine as he leans forward. “Yes, it’s a recruiting tool, rhetorically. Many people see there’s an injustice there, and it helps them to get people into the gang, but it’s not what they want. What they want is to change the nature of human life on earth into the image of the Taliban. If you want the whole earth to look like Taliban Afghanistan, then you’re on the same side as them. If you don’t want that, you’re not. They do not represent the quest for human justice. That, I think, is one of the great mistakes of the left.”

There he goes again accusing the left of apologizing for the terrorists.

26 Kind of, err, Naziish, eh?

Yep. I've noted in various comments on other's blogs that the Mike Rogers approach closely resembles Turner Diaries/Hunter style race traitor logic. (I've read TD & Hunter, so I'm not talking out my ass here commenting on something I've not actually seen. You gotta know your enemy and read their shit to really understand where their headspace is at).

When you get comfy with that sort of thinking all sorts of bad shit is going to come out of it.

27 Here's one thing I don't get:

Let's assume that the Lefty claim -- that social cons are so repulsed by homosexuality -- is true. Let's assume that I'm a social con living in Idaho, and that I discover my Senator is secretly gay.

Even with that assumption, why would I vote for a Democrat, which represents the party that actively embraces homosexuality? That is, if I know that the Dems are enthusiastically pro-gay, why would I support them just because I learn that my Senator is gay (which, we're assuming, repulses me)?

Perhaps the response will be "they hope you'll stay home in disgust." But of course, that means supporting the Democrats. Anyone with a functioning brain cell knows that failure to vote for one candidate supports the other candidate. And why would I support the candidate that represents the enthusiastically pro-gay-marriage crowd, if we've started with the assumption that I'm completely repulsed by homosexuality?

28 The left thinks the social cons are as stupid and shallow as they are.

29 Sobeck, Idaho isn't a very religious state to begin with. It's as red as any state, but on any given day you could find somone who votes democrat smoking weed and shooting kick ass firearms with someone who votes republican. This isn't going to threaten Craig, imho.

There is another guy, Sali, who if elected will be the new Cynthia Jackson. He isn't only crazy he is also a total dick. He yelled at the democratic leader, who had cancer which he believes was because of an abortion, until she started crying in the statehouse. The Republicans kicked him out and my congressman, Simpson R-ID 2nd district, allegedly threatened to throw him out a window.

30 I meant C. McKinney from Georgia not C. Jackson.

31 Am I the only moron who had to look up calumny

and Sine Qua Non?

Quick, someone say pooter.

32 --28 The left thinks the social cons are as stupid and shallow as they are.--

Nutshell.

33 Pooter !!

And Rectitude.

Rectitude; Hell ,it Killtitude.



Sorry, I had to.

34 "Let them recognize partnerships - gay and straight. Marriage has meant something for many thousands of years, so we'd appreciate it if we don't go doing the Big Brother business and start changing them."

This - the "civil unions" compromise - would be the position that could actually get majority support.

So of course it won't happen. Instead, the debate will be defined by Falwell on the right, and Sullivan on the left.

35 Kemon writes:
"This - the "civil unions" compromise - would be the position that could actually get majority support."

I must not get out much. Guess as a Congregationalist (who tries his best to avoid the UCC and has a church a blink away from leaving those anti-semetic leftists), I don't follow Falwell so I don't follow his opposition - I always thought that "gays are evil" stuff was like liberal cartoon stuff.

Should mention... the kids go to a school with about 30 in a grade, to give you an idea how podunk we are. They've got a gal who's a great teacher's aid for kindergarden who's a long-time partner to a gal who works at the Caseys. Again, I've *never* heard anyone make a negative comment. Guess we're all more worried about fixing our own problems. Which leads me to think the solution for liberals is to seize their trust funds.

I'd swear, every single narcissistic, nihlistic, hate-spewing, paranoid liberal activist nutjob always comes with daddy's trust fund. Kinda like the sicko Emperor wannabe in "Gladiator" who loathed anyone smart, successful or popular, wanted to screw his sister and spread misery and death. Go read DailyKos and tell me that's not the same people.

Take the trust funds and let them scrape by for a living and we'll see much better people.

36 How did this happen? How did the gay left go from understanding that this was the Big Magillah that would take perhaps a generation to enact through thoughtful argument, to suddenly deciding the moment was right now, and anyone who disagreed was not merely someone who had to be convinced through reason, but a "hater" to be despised like the Devil himself?

Because they bought into the nonsense sold to them by liberalism. The Dems have shown time and time again that they have no problem exploiting an issue and using a group to attain power, without a care in the world what the results are. I myself thought the Court's decision went too far and would have preferred something through the legislature. Ever since Roe vs. Wade the courts do not seem to have learned that forcing a controversial issue on people does not resolve it but instead magnifies it, embitters people, and kills any real movement for change. What has been the result of this move by gay liberal activists? 20 states now have amendments banning gay marriage, most including civil unions and domestic partnerships as well. Instead of making the case for some kind of marriage or union for these couples, they attempted to short-circuit the debate and strong-arm the process. Never wise.

Having said all this, what has been disgusting for me to watch are those on the Right who ARE homophobes use this and their politico allies exploit it for votes. I'm sick of being their whipping boy, and no I don't like that. Ace might, but I do not.

When it comes marriage, a lot of us figure the government shouldn't have any business recognizing marriage. Let them recognize partnerships - gay and straight.

I would have been more than satisfied with civil unions for gay couples. The GOP missed a golden opportunity by not embracing something along those lines while simultaneously rejecting same-sex marriage. I would have had more respect for that, it would have been more in keeping with the conservativism the party claims it believes in, and it would have allowed the matter some time to develop out of the limelight of partisan bickering.

37 Pooter-centric is sine qua non for AoS lifestyle

38 John-

Totally follow you on that, particularly working in show biz... my sister ran into a bit of a quandary working at the Heritage Foundation in a similar vein. Basically, as they were making policy, if it strayed too far from the conservative approach, it was tossed so as not to jeopardize funding. I imagine the same thing came up in some of these bills... the decision was made to throw red meat out there in order to drum up the masses.

And thanks for your analysis of things.

tmi3rd

39
I didn't have anything to do with Studds' death, but the timing of the event is good.

No, not because he died. His "husband" is looking to collect on his pension. Studds left Congress in '96, got "married" in '04.

So this...man...has been Studds'...husband for only 2 years and wants his $114K federal pension.

This dredges up the whole nasty affair of gay marriage only weeks before the election which will motivate a big Republican turnout.

It also helps when GLAAD and other ultra liberal organizations come to Studds' "husband's" defense and refer to Studds as once a "distinguished member" of Congress just days after calling Mark Foley a disgraced pedophile.

Hey Liberals, in your faces, bitch!

40 the left's reaction to the foley thing, and now this, just sickens me. they're all about diversity, as long as it's not diversity of thought.

a liberal I spar with on an email list is more honest than most, but more loony than most too. he's just certain that Foley did nothing wrong, it was the way the republicans abandoned him that was the real crime, that they should have backed him instead of jumping to cover their asses.

In other words, If only republicans would embrace our deviates like the democrats do, we wouldn't be in so much trouble.

41 Having said all this, what has been disgusting for me to watch are those on the Right who ARE homophobes use this and their politico allies exploit it for votes.

Actually I believe the percentage of the Homophobe Right Wingers is lower than people think. The Left and MSM think that all Fundies are snake-handling morons that live in shacks in the back woods. And nothing could be further from the Truth. I am a Fundie and proud of it, but I also happen to be an intelligent Fundie that doesn't drink from Falwell's cup of kool-aide and hate. The Donks are counting on these outing to alienate the base "values voter" and they are in for a big surprise when the "value voters" get out and vote R.

42 they're all about diversity, as long as it's not diversity of thought.

Exactly.

43 As an eeeeevil right wing conspirator who sort of forgot to out one of his sergeants (gay, shmay, I wasn't gonna waste a perfectly good E-7), I love it when the lefties expect us to start frothing the minute John Kerry gulps the word 'lesbian.'

It's been my experience conservatives are much better at seeing people inside labels than any lefty.

44 How did this happen? How did the gay left go from understanding that this was the Big Magillah that would take perhaps a generation to enact through thoughtful argument, to suddenly deciding the moment was right now, and anyone who disagreed was not merely someone who had to be convinced through reason, but a "hater" to be despised like the Devil himself?

Impulse control: it's what's the gay community is all about...

45 Two thoughts.

1) homophobia is an idiot term I wish people would just stop using. 2) Civil Unions instead of gay marriages is a compromise like having moderately liberal judges rather than liberally moderate ones. It's the same damn thing with another name, that's not a compromise, that's a win for one side while pretending you're magnanimous and diplomatic.

46 I would imagine that the reason Greenwald didn't engage in the sort of the ass-covering that you expected--other than it being his indication that perhaps you could kiss it--is that the post had nothing at all to do with the rightness or wrongness of outing gay conservatives. He was making one point, and one point only--which he rendered in the customarily merciless detail that so drives wingers crazy: that it is ridiculous for conservatives to decry such use of private sexual matters for partisan gain.

Luciannne's tubby son lecturing us on the propriety of personal destruction? Please. The Pantload, Ingraham and Coulter, Drudge, and a host of others, practically cut their teeth on Clinton's cock. All Greenwald is saying is that a little self-awareness on some people's part would go a long way towards us not laughing our asses off every time they open their mouths.

Oh, and nice little misdirection with that sweet rumination about why, oh why, does left demand that all homosexuals adhere to the "gay agenda." Greenwald never says in his post that they must. Again, it's not the perceived hypocrisy of a gay politican not supporting gay rights that's at issue. It's the hypocrisy of conservatives caring only about how outing gay republicans will affect their evangelical base, but dressing it up in this absurd lament for the loss of privacy and dignity. As if this event were the turning point, when politics turned squalid.

Every winger I've read who has written about the Craig outing has just had to offer up their prediction that this was going to backfire on the democrats. (Sure, it's bound fire up those constituents of Craig's who think homosexuals are going burn in hell, just to show those damn dems.) It seems to me worth noting that Democratic politicans don't have make such wishful calculations.

47 which he rendered in the customarily merciless detail

Thanks, I needed that.

Tob

48 Let's assume that the Lefty claim -- that social cons are so repulsed by homosexuality -- is true. Let's assume that I'm a social con living in Idaho, and that I discover my Senator is secretly gay.

Even with that assumption, why would I vote for a Democrat, which represents the party that actively embraces homosexuality?

The idea behind this strategy is not to get social cons to vote for Dems instead of Republicans, but to get them so disgusted with their own party that they'll stay home on election day. "Supressing the base" I believe it's called.

49 "Supressing the base" I believe it's called.

OregonMuse,
Youa re right, they are trying to supress the social cons. But as a Social Con, I say let them try to supress this **graps crotch**!

If us Social Cons have any common sense or a lick of intelligence, we know what the Donks are trying to do, and it pisses us off enough to make sure we DO vote and invite a bunch of friends also!

50 I gotchya suppression, right heeerrreee!

51 Yep. It's all about getting people to stay home. I'm not falling for it, and neither should you. They are trying to manipulate you, they are trying to play you.

Don't be a hippy. Vote.

52

John Swansboro:

I've got to know...who's "the pantload"?

You seem to be misreading the situation.

#1 Conservatives have no right to complain about the outing of "private sexual matters" after how we treated Bill Clinton, I presume. Ya'll are still hot under the collar over that one. The thing is, Clinton was a sleezy philanderer engaging in sexual acts with a young intern while POTUS, in the oval office, no less, which he lied under oath about. There was a long pattern of misbehavior on his part leading up to this debacle. Bill Clinton turned out to be his own worst enemy. In Tom Foley's case, he turned out to be his own worst enemy, and an investigation will find out who (including Democrats) knew what and when about the emails. Republicans were happy to kiss him goodbye. In the current situation it remains to be seen that this is anything but a malicious and untrue smear designed to ruin a Republican's re-election chances. And we can say anything we want about it.

#2 From what I can gather, conservatives are not yet concerned about how their base reacts to this. Many, in fact seem to think it will fire them up, because the Dem's are flinging this kind of shit at a Republican 3 weeks before an election.

#3 If these allegations are proven to be true, (and so far, they've been laughed off) it would indeed not bode well for the Senator, as he is a married man with children and grandchildren, and most normal people (not just Evangelicals) would frown on that. You proudly claim that Democratic politicians don't have to make "such wishful calculations" (about the base getting fired up). We know...we know.

#4 It seems counter-intuitive to you that a religious base that disapproves with homosexuality might get fired up at the thought of an unfair outing of one. In cases where a marriage and children are not involved, most people ( like me, for instance), who consider homosexuality a sin, would not consider it a factor, if he was reliably conservative on most issues. (We are all sinners, for cripes sake). The fact that the person kept it private would not be seen as dishonest, but discreet. We would consider the dirty tricks involved with outing one to be lowdown and dirty, though.

 

 

53 I really am honest, I want to know why anyone gives a rip what Greenwald said, what did he do to suddenly show up some blog superstar? Who was this guy before that?

54 Greenwald only has a New York Times Best Selling Book on the Bush Administration and its abuses of power. And he has one of the most-read blogs on the Interent, after 9 months of blogging. And Senators read from his blog at Senate hearings and his posts lead to front-page news stories in major newspapers.

55 I really am honest, I want to know why anyone gives a rip what Greenwald said, what did he do to suddenly show up some blog superstar? Who was this guy before that?

Before this, Glenn Greenwad was the internet's most notorious sockpuppet.

56 Who was this guy before that?

A fluffer in gay porn vids.

57 Nice Deb:

"The Doughy Pantload" is a term of endearment by which many blog-mavens on the left refer to Goldberg. There's alot of petty name-calling on these here nets (yes, I'm guilty), but that's a sobriquet that is damn near perfect.

#1. Sure, you can say anything you want; yes, you have the right. Neither of which self-evident truths, however, obviates Greenwald's lone point that it is hypocritical in the extreme for republicans to be outraged over the politics of personal destruction, in which they have a very recent, cluttered history of participating, with gusto. Clinton is just one of quite a few examples that Greenwald gave of republicans playing the sexuality card. (For example, a new book by a couple of conservative hackettes claims that Cindy Sheehan is addicted to internet porn. That's elevating the tone, for ya.) Hell, for many family-value republicans, democrats are the party of perversion and promiscuity; the missionary position is practically in your party platform.

Now, perhaps you believe that Clinton deserved to have all that Scaife-financed intrusion into his personal life, the endless prying and harrassment (while we had troops in harm's way in Balkans, by the way), not to discredit his policies, but the man himself. But then it should come as no surprise to you that there are those who believe that a closeted republican who wraps himself in a pro-family agenda is fair game as well.

#2. Of course, they're concerned, hence all the calculation, on nearly every righty blog. This might backfire on the dems; it's three weeks before the election; etc. Y'all sense the fundie base is getting fidgety--all that dedicated support and so little to show for six years of conservative rule--and this the election where they're needed more than ever.

#3. Sure, the infidelity part cuts a broader swathe, because it raises more issues, but bottom line: no single gay man in a loving monogamous relationship wins the republican nomination for dogcatcher in any of the red states. One of the benefits of being of the pervert party is that a democratic politician doesn't have be a hypocrit in this way.

#4. See #3. Plus, politics is, and always has been, by parts, policy, leadership and dirty tricks. You seem to think--or to need to think--that your party is less inclined to engage in the latter. I just happen to agree with my party on more issues, and try not delude myself that in the contest for power, most politicians aren't capable of anything.

In any event, things should be calming down pretty soon, and we can all go back to calling each other, depending on the issue, evil and/or stupid. Spater.

58

John Swansboro,

You don't understand the conservative mindset. I tried to explain it to you. I'm no different from most religious conservatives, myself, and I. don't. hate. gays. I'm just disgusted with these tactics. And I'm not worried about how the base is reacting to this,.

You mention some book on Cindy Sheehan most people haven't even heard of. Believe me, if I haven't heard of it, most people haven't heard of it. You can't compare that to this concerted effort from the left to "out" Republicans. Most people have heard about Mark Foley, ad Nauseam. Comon.

You're right about two things, I do think your party is more inclined to engage in dirty tricks at election time, and yours is the pervert party.

59 Oh, and I love Jonah Goldberg!

60 And John, the bottom line here is not Greenwald's feigned outrage at republicans for their aversion to democratic outing tactics; rather it is the overarching fact that democrats on one hand claim again and again that they are the party of toleration when in comes to so-called "deviant" lifestyles (i.e. homosexuality, et al), yet can not shed their mask fast enough to turn their backs on the same homosexual they were filling with hope that the dems will fight for him and his rights if he turns out to be conservative.

For most people in America who don't follow politics carefully and read every story that comes out, the decision to follow one line of thinking over the other can more often than not be swayed by the consistancy of which said party follows their positons.

That being said, you tell me how consistant it is for the democratic party to go on national TV and openly critisize republicans for being homophobic, to turn around and engage in the same, (and most times worse), tactics they spoke out so eliquoently against on a homosexual who happens to be conservative?

In short, no one is trying to pretend that either side is an angel while the other is satan (...well, never mind). All I and I think others are pointing out is it is downright disengenious to think that it is okay to actively seek ruination on another person whose lifestyle you pretend to so valiantly support when it turns out they don't share your same political views. That kind of outing behavior sends the message that your partisan politics are more important that any individual's own personal feelings and values.

Besides, greenwald is a fucking sock puppeting hypocrite. Who gives a flying fuck what he thinks anyway?

61 Others have said this already, but I'll have to repeat. This...

Why are non-religious blue staters like me so in favor of the Republican Party?

Because the left is fundamentally creepy and nasty, and compounds the revulsion by claiming their creepiness and nastiness to be moral and principled.

...is pretty much the most pithy explanation possible why I myself, as a blue state secularist, am also a diehard Republican despite my divorce from the religious right on cultural issues.

62 OK let me ask this again. Greenwald only has a New York Times Best Selling Book on the Bush Administration and its abuses of power. And he has one of the most-read blogs on the Interent, after 9 months of blogging. And Senators read from his blog at Senate hearings and his posts lead to front-page news stories in major newspapers. And... why is this so? Why did he get this huge blog to start with, why a best selling book? Why after 9 months does he get so much attention? It's not his content, he says nothing new. Why this huge start, why does anyone care what he says?

63 Nice Deb:

I grew up in the South. Jesse Helms was my senator for years, and before that, I can remember his "editorials" ending the local newcasts, spouting off about the "nigras" and the homosexuals and the commies. In grad school, I spent a year working on Frank Porter Graham's papers for the Southern Historical Collection at Chapel Hill. You should look into the story of Willis Smith's primary campaign for Senate against Graham some time. Jesse had a big hand in making it one of the ugliest in memory. By the way, all those nasty good ol' boys, with their progeny in tow--Carter Wrenn and that fat atwater Tom Ellis--soon switched their allegiance to the Republican party, and brought their bag of dirty tricks with them, all part of the southern strategy.

I'm in the construction-supply business with one of my oldest friends and his old man, both Southern born and bred. I hear the n-word everyday, and disparaging remarks about gays and Mexicans are casual conversation, even among many of our oldest business contacts. And you should see my joke and political email. We have a hand-signed letter from Bush 41 framed on the wall of our lobby. The mere mention of Reagan's name makes them stand at attention, and as for Bush 43, their attitude is, "he may be a fool, but he's our fool."

In law school, my buddies were mostly libertarians, invariably die-hards, and we had endless heated discussions. (It’s my experience that libertarians have to be good debaters, because they have such flimsy material to work with.) Granted, I'm not that tight with evangelicals—and I know no serious evangelical personally well--but unless I'm given reason to believe otherwise, I take them at their word: love the sinner, hate the sin. They live all around me, my whole life; I know they’re good people, who can think for themselves.

All of which is to say—and at risk of acting like this was the essay section of my e-harmony application—I do know conservatives, southern conservatives. They’re my best and oldest friends, with whom I have daily interaction. And sure, while there are hundreds of thousands of them who, like you, will be more outraged at the outing as a dirty trick—and it is (I don’t think Craig’s even up for re-election)—there are surely many other thousands who will perceive just another family unfriendly scandal involving a Republican. Of course, the greater proportion, and this is certainly not limited to conservatives or southerners, won’t know, won’t care.

You’re better than your party, Deb. There’s just too much evidence of dastardly republican politicking over the years for a democrat to take any republican claim to the high ground seriously. And that was the principal thrust of Greenwald’s post, regardless of whatever it was that Ace was going on about.

By the way, here's the book trashing Cindy Sheehan's sexuality. It was just released, which is probably why you haven't heard of it. But you will. Fox is flogging it like Willie Shoemaker down the backstretch.

64 Oh, and you can have Jonah Goldberg. Luckily you don't have to pay for him by the pound.

65 I do know conservatives, southern conservatives.

Conservativism and racism may find root in the same host, but they are not interdependent. Liberals, on the other hand, have an inherent insidious racism (actually a subset of the "I know what's best for you" mindset) in their rhetoric, values, and policies.

Racist conservatives may someday be cured, but non-elitist liberals cannot exist.

66 For example, a new book by a couple of conservative hackettes claims that Cindy Sheehan is addicted to internet porn.

That's not what the book (which I had never heard of until you mentioned it) said. And calling them "hackettes" certainly elevates the tone of itself, doesn't it?

67 Liberal hypocracy like when liberals want gun control except for themselves and their bodyguards like ROSIE O,DONNELL and PAT KENNEDY

68

John Swansboro:

I guess, sad to say, there are still pockets in the south where racism still exists. In my own life, (and I've lived in NY, MO, CO, MN, and AZ) I've rarely, if ever observed it.

But you paint with a wide brush when you let a minority of southern conservatives represent us all. That is not the Republican party.

Although, of course you're right, the Republicans are not always angels....

However, the Democratic party, in my book wins the prize, hands down when it comes to dirty campaigning, and election fraud.

69 Protein Table Eat Healthier Foods Supplements Fitness Vagetable Table Fruit Table Vitamin Table FAQ about Foods Recipes Quick Tips Costsaving Tips Foods

70 Even a normal cruise liner has world class Sports/Fitness Wine and Dine Onboard Entertainment rolex submariner and other basic facilities Cartier Pasha De replica cartier watches replica cartier tank watch cartier tankissime watches cartier 21 chronoscaph replica cartier and rolex cheap replicas Cartier replica Must de cheap cartier replica watches cartier 18007 replica cartie cartier 21 chronoscaph replica cheap cartier replica watches cartier replica cartier pasha watches Cartier Pasha De Cartier replica watchesHypocrisy On HypocrisyGreat. found your site on del.icio.us

71 rolex daytona for sale la pulsera solidaria de cartier Comments (0) replica watches rolex daytona fake rolex watches for men replica rolex submariner Tagged rolex Posted in watches rolex classic for sale replica rolex gmt master ii rolex watches for sale rolex sea dweller By admin cheap rolex watches rolex daytona for sale I ve born the road rolex watches for sale rolex classic for sale but i have not perceived the number daybreak before rolex air king for sale rolex replica rolex explorer for sale replica watchesHypocrisy On HypocrisyIt posts like this that keep me coming back and checking this site regularly, thanks for the info!

72 Official site of OMEGA watches tag heuer carrera 20007 tag heuer carrera 20164 repleca tag heuer monaco replica tag heuer formula Manufacturer of prestige Swiss watches since 1848 Tag Heuer Monaco V4 Limited Edition replica repluca tag heuer link replica tag heuer watches how to clean tag heuer glass tag heuer replica replica tag heuer watches how to clean tag heuer glass tag heuer grand carrera watch tag heuer aquaracer tag heuer replica tag heuer carrera 20164 repleca World-renowned Swiss famous brand Jewelry Omega Watches replica watchesHypocrisy On HypocrisyI completely agree with the above comment,

73 omega replica sea master omega fake omega watches omega seamaster breitling 1884 Comments (0) omega co axial Tagged seiko omega replica deville omega seamaster Posted in watches omega watches omega seamaster replica replica omega watches replica omega wathc omega replica speedmaster By admin I may have an long enka for the hair omega watches will have to develop leonard homicide omega replica sea master Also omega replica sea master replica watchesHypocrisy On HypocrisyI completely agree with the above comment

74 Ballon Blue de Cartier The total weight of 2347 star by 68 66 carats of diamonds and brilliant cut 3 67 carat total weight of 68 star of brown diamond and 434 cartier santos 87 grams of platinum Cartier Pasha De replica Cartier Tank Americaine replica watches replica cartier la donna replica cartier watches Cartier replica Must de fake cartier watch cartier replica watches Cartier replica Must de cartier blue cartier replica watches for men repica cartier balloon blue for men Cartier Pasha De replica cartier 21 chronoscaph replica replica watchesHypocrisy On HypocrisyPretty good post.

75 breitling avenger seawolf breitling mont brillant breitling watches replica Many people are looking for chic and sophisticated watches with prestigious brand names breitling replica navitimer replica breitling watches replica breitling replica breitling watches replique breitling montbrillant fake breitling bentley watches However many of these same people find that the cost of these name replica breitling watches breitling cockpit watches breitling cockpit replica replica breitling cockpit replica breitling montbrillant breitling superocean watches replica watchesHypocrisy On HypocrisyI just stumbled upon your blog and wanted to say that I have really enjoyed reading your blog posts.

76 Enjoy Niceville! I’ve been there a couple of times for work. They have a great public library.
.................................................................................................
.................................................................................................
.................................................................................................
.................................................................................................
.................................................................................................
.................................................................................................
.................................................................................................
.................................................................................................
.................................................................................................
.................................................................................................
.................................................................................................
............ Posted by: kala at June 12, 2010 03:47 AM (mE0mX)

Posted by: replica watches at August 20, 2010 10:30 AM (pZTyO)

Name: *

Email: *

URL:

Comments:

Processing 0.1, elapsed 0.0885 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0071 seconds, 86 records returned.
Page size 157 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.